Tony Mowbray Discussion

[Mashed Potatoes]

2 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Probably not unusual for a few clubs and an overhaul is better than a rebuilding job.  However i think as we've seen this season it can hold you back whilst they try and find the right formula and try out players, often in different positions. Tony likes an experiment that's for sure.

Where i feel we / he fall down on this compared to some other clubs is working to a real plan and recruiting for that plan and style of play.

Hopefully this summer will be about building on what we have in a determined fashion to start the season with a core style that's been successful the back end of this season. And suits the players we have and ones brought in to fit that style not all start again mix and match.

We say it every summer but this one really will be a benchmark for the near future because there will have to be an outgoing.  Lets hope it isn't 2 or 3 otherwise midtable mediocrity will be being hailed again this time next season.

I think it is our push for the playoffs that is being hailed. I think Mowbray has made it clear that signings have to fit in with the ethos that he has installed at the club - be it attitude or playing style. Hence why he was right to refuse to make signings in the transfer window if the players available weren't right.

[jim mk2]

5 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

 Hence why he was right to refuse to make signings in the transfer window if the players available weren't right.

Are you saying he wouldn't have made signings if money had been forthcoming from the owners? Our failure to strengthen was down to lack of funding, not  player availablity

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, jim mk2 said:

Are you saying he wouldn't have made signings if money had been forthcoming from the owners? Our failure to strengthen was down to lack of funding, not  player availablity

The two are interlinked; you may have some funding to buy players but not enough for the players you want.

[chaddyrovers]

30 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

I'd say we need about the same, 5 or 6 signings next summer, however we should see more departures with Mulgrew and Smallwood needing shifting. I think 'significant overhaul' is a significant overstatement.

I would say we need 2 keeper, back up right back, 2 centre back, 1 left back as I expect Bell will be given a extension, 1 winger and striker. Plus I would re-sign Downing on a year contract

12 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I think it is our push for the playoffs that is being hailed. I think Mowbray has made it clear that signings have to fit in with the ethos that he has installed at the club - be it attitude or playing style. Hence why he was right to refuse to make signings in the transfer window if the players available weren't right.

Mowbray is correct that they have to fit into the club ethos and signings have to be right. I suspect majority of signings this summer will be foreign ones. 

[DE.]

8 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Are you saying he wouldn't have made signings if money had been forthcoming from the owners? Our failure to strengthen was down to lack of funding, not  player availablity

Didn't Mowbray and Waggott say at the supporters group meeting that extra funding was available from the owners if they asked for it, but they chose not to?

[47er]

We need probably 7 players this summer which is an eloquent comment on last summer's Transfer Window.

Some of our key players are not our's, some players are getting on and there is poor balance in the squad.

 

However, we are winning so what do I know?!!

 

[Sparks Rover]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I suspect majority of signings this summer will be foreign ones. 

I suspect not

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, 47er said:

We need probably 7 players this summer which is an eloquent comment on last summer's Transfer Window.

Some of our key players are not our's, some players are getting on and there is poor balance in the squad.

 

However, we are winning so what do I know?!!

 

Use of the loan system is a necessary part of the skill of player recruitment in the Championship and inevitably means that most clubs in this division will face needing to bring in a fair number of players each year. On Saturday West Brom used 3 loan players and Leeds used 4 with another on the bench.

Transfers are a means to an end - improved results on the pitch - not an end in themselves. 

[tomphil]

23 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

I think it is our push for the playoffs that is being hailed. I think Mowbray has made it clear that signings have to fit in with the ethos that he has installed at the club - be it attitude or playing style. Hence why he was right to refuse to make signings in the transfer window if the players available weren't right.

He himself has held up Sheff U, PKE and Brentford in recent times as models to follow, all different models.  I'd grudgingly hold up Dingles of a few years back and Watford are another.

They need to decide which model it is they want to follow, those clubs seem to get around the things that get held up here as excuses. 

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, tomphil said:

He himself has held up Sheff U, PKE and Brentford in recent times as models to follow, all different models.  I'd grudgingly hold up Dingles of a few years back and Watford are another.

They need to decide which model it is they want to follow, those clubs seem to get around the things that get held up here as excuses. 

Crikey - he's had more models than Rod Stewart.

[tomphil]

Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

Crikey - he's had more models than Rod Stewart.

Even Rod settled on one when he got to Tony's age ?

[chaddyrovers]

54 minutes ago, DE. said:

Didn't Mowbray and Waggott say at the supporters group meeting that extra funding was available from the owners if they asked for it, but they chose not to?

Surely that would depend on what we value the player at and the asking price. for example if we offer 500k for player who is out of contract in the summer but his club wanted 5 times that amount? surely the owners wouldn't agree to it. would you? 

49 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

I suspect not

why?

[Sparks Rover]

How many foreign players has Mowbray bought since he's been here? I mean proper foreign, not Holtby.

[DE.]

3 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Surely that would depend on what we value the player at and the asking price. for example if we offer 500k for player who is out of contract in the summer but his club wanted 5 times that amount? surely the owners wouldn't agree to it. would you? 

That's just fictitious speculation though. We can only go off what was said at the meeting, and what TM/Waggott have always said - that the owners are willing to give them money if it's needed. To take the view that the owners are withholding funding is once again insinuating our manager is an outright liar - which is odd as it's usually those who claim to support him no matter what making these remarks. 

Edited February 18, 2020 by DE.

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, DE. said:

That's just fictitious speculation though. We can only go off what was said at the meeting, and what TM/Waggott have always said - that the owners are willing to give them money if it's needed. To take the view that the owners are withholding funding is once again insinuating our manager is an outright liar - which is odd as it's usually those who claim to support him no matter what making these remarks. 

I'm sure the owners would give Mowbray extra money if Mowbray asked for it but he wont sign players who are too expensive or break our wage structure. 

Like I said I used has an example. 

Just now, Sparks Rover said:

How many foreign players has Mowbray bought since he's been here? I mean proper foreign, not Holtby.

Rovers have invested money into the European scouting network and bring in head of European scouting Bruno Riberio. Plus listening to what Mowbray has said over the past few weeks that where I expect signings to come from 

[JHRover]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

I'm sure the owners would give Mowbray extra money if Mowbray asked for it but he wont sign players who are too expensive or break our wage structure. 

Like I said I used has an example. 

Rovers have invested money into the European scouting network and bring in head of European scouting Bruno Riberio. Plus listening to what Mowbray has said over the past few weeks that where I expect signings to come from 

What sort of manager turns down the option of funds to strengthen his squad? Can you imagine Mark Hughes telling the Abu Dhabi group that he didn't want their cash because it might break the wage structure or upset one or two around the place.

A manager works with resources available to him. If it is correct that Venkys have offered money but he has elected not to spend it then that is a very unusual thing to happen.

Imagine if we get to the end of the season and finish 1 point off the top six. Normal owners would be asking why the manager refused or failed to strengthen in January with promotion obviously achievable.

Mowbray must have a very relaxed view about things if he thinks he or we have all the time to turn down transfer cash when in need of more depth.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Just now, JHRover said:

What sort of manager turns down the option of funds to strengthen his squad? Can you imagine Mark Hughes telling the Abu Dhabi group that he didn't want their cash because it might break the wage structure or upset one or two around the place.

A manager works with resources available to him. If it is correct that Venkys have offered money but he has elected not to spend it then that is a very unusual thing to happen.

Imagine if we get to the end of the season and finish 1 point off the top six. Normal owners would be asking why the manager refused or failed to strengthen in January with promotion obviously achievable.

Mowbray must have a very relaxed view about things if he thinks he or we have all the time to turn down transfer cash when in need of more depth.

Or maybe the right deal just wasn't there ?

[JHRover]

Just now, Mashed Potatoes said:

Or maybe the right deal just wasn't there ?

What does that even mean? 

You have your budget, identify attainable players and work on those. You have a plan b, c and d if a doesn't work. Everyone else manages it.

2 years running now we've been told there's plenty of money yet it doesn't materialise, except in odd cases like Brereton.

If a deal was unaffordable e.g. Assombalonga then why bother trying?

Personally I suspect it is just arse covering when the fans question what is happening. Don't think India would be too impressed if Mowbray and Waggott pointed responsibility at their front door. Much easier and more sensible to keep in their good books.

 

[DE.]

19 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I'm sure the owners would give Mowbray extra money if Mowbray asked for it but he wont sign players who are too expensive or break our wage structure. 

Like I said I used has an example. 

We're talking about two different things here though. I'm directly refuting the suggestion that funds are being withheld from TM as it doesn't tally up with anything he's said in the past. What you're talking about is his decision to spend the potential extra money available which is a different topic. 

[roversfan99]

Theres a lot of revisionism about the transfer window, it was a failure. Mowbray wanted signings and had a small but tangible transfer budget as well as the option to request more, apparently. He failed to get signings. Its not even necessarily critical to accept that, Mowbray himself admitted dissapointment. 

I am sure that other players were available even if our initial targets were unobtainable and indeed there is no need to create specific reasons and excuses as if it was all part of the plan to end up with no one.

[Bigdoggsteel]

17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Theres a lot of revisionism about the transfer window, it was a failure. Mowbray wanted signings and had a small but tangible transfer budget as well as the option to request more, apparently. He failed to get signings. Its not even necessarily critical to accept that, Mowbray himself admitted dissapointment. 

I am sure that other players were available even if our initial targets were unobtainable and indeed there is no need to create specific reasons and excuses as if it was all part of the plan to end up with no one.

"There's a lot of revisionism?" That's some savage hyperbole right there. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

30 minutes ago, JHRover said:

What does that even mean? 

You have your budget, identify attainable players and work on those. You have a plan b, c and d if a doesn't work. Everyone else manages it.

2 years running now we've been told there's plenty of money yet it doesn't materialise, except in odd cases like Brereton.

If a deal was unaffordable e.g. Assombalonga then why bother trying?

Personally I suspect it is just arse covering when the fans question what is happening. Don't think India would be too impressed if Mowbray and Waggott pointed responsibility at their front door. Much easier and more sensible to keep in their good books.

 

Ya, after selling players, in some instances. Pity we didn't get 1 or 2 in, but I would take our window over say Hulls 

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

"There's a lot of revisionism?" That's some savage hyperbole right there. 

Not really. People are justifying it by giving potential and in some cases hypothetical reasons why we didnt sign players, but the main point is that we went in the window aiming to bring in reinforcements which didnt materialise. Ergo, black and white, it was a failure in terms of our objectives and the manager even admitted his disapointment. For some reason, people feel the need to defend it and justify it as if its a character assassination or an overall judgement of Mowbray, its not, just as an individual judgement, it is a valid assertion to say the window was a failure.

[Mashed Potatoes]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Not really. People are justifying it by giving potential and in some cases hypothetical reasons why we didnt sign players, but the main point is that we went in the window aiming to bring in reinforcements which didnt materialise. Ergo, black and white, it was a failure in terms of our objectives and the manager even admitted his disapointment. For some reason, people feel the need to defend it and justify it as if its a character assassination or an overall judgement of Mowbray, its not, just as an individual judgement, it is a valid assertion to say the window was a failure.

It's not  "failure" if the right players aren't there at the right prices. It's a question of exercising judgement - it would have been failure if we had brought the wrong players in.

[chaddyrovers]

49 minutes ago, JHRover said:

What sort of manager turns down the option of funds to strengthen his squad? Can you imagine Mark Hughes telling the Abu Dhabi group that he didn't want their cash because it might break the wage structure or upset one or two around the place.

A manager works with resources available to him. If it is correct that Venkys have offered money but he has elected not to spend it then that is a very unusual thing to happen.

Imagine if we get to the end of the season and finish 1 point off the top six. Normal owners would be asking why the manager refused or failed to strengthen in January with promotion obviously achievable.

Mowbray must have a very relaxed view about things if he thinks he or we have all the time to turn down transfer cash when in need of more depth.

If the right players/targets aren't available then we take a risk on a player we haven't scouted properly. Well maybe it doesn't matter but keeping team morale high is a good thing. Look at what happened when we high earners not pulling their weight like Murphy, Best, Etuhu. 

Just imagine that we finish in playoffs cos we keep the team morale together and not over spend on targets we didn't want or too high price

41 minutes ago, JHRover said:

 

You have your budget, identify attainable players and work on those. You have a plan b, c and d if a doesn't work. Everyone else manages it.

2 years running now we've been told there's plenty of money yet it doesn't materialise, except in odd cases like Brereton.

If a deal was unaffordable e.g. Assombalonga then why bother trying?

Personally I suspect it is just arse covering when the fans question what is happening. Don't think India would be too impressed if Mowbray and Waggott pointed responsibility at their front door. Much easier and more sensible to keep in their good books.

 

Very easy for a fans to say this. As Mowbray has said we wont sign players we haven't scouted properly. If those players we want aren't available or price too high then we are right to walk away. 

32 minutes ago, DE. said:

We're talking about two different things here though. I'm directly refuting the suggestion that funds are being withheld from TM as it doesn't tally up with anything he's said in the past. What you're talking about is his decision to spend the potential extra money available which is a different topic. 

Funds aren't being withheld tho. Mowbray has a budget to work with.